McDaniel v. United Railways Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. (1) There was no ambiguity in tbe contract of release sued upon; tbe consideration clause was not a mere receipt but inter alia was a contract to pay tbe bill of Dr. Brokaw; and tbe court therefore erred in admitting parol evidence to very and extend its terms so as to include an agreement to furnish tbe services of Dr. Brokaw. Jackson v. Railroad, 54 Mo. App. 636; Tate v. Railroad, 131 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. (1) There was no ambiguity in tbe contract of release sued upon; tbe consideration clause was not a mere receipt but inter alia was a contract to pay tbe bill of Dr. Brokaw; and tbe court therefore erred in admitting parol evidence to very and extend its terms so as to include an agreement to furnish tbe services of Dr. Brokaw. Jackson v. Railroad, 54 Mo. App. 636; Tate v. Railroad, 131 Mo. App. 107; Koons v. Car Co., 203 Mo. 227; Catalogue Co. v. Weber, 130 Mo. App. 646. (2) The court erred in refusing to direct a…
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
This is a suit for damages accrued on account of a breach of contract. Plaintiff recovered and defendant prosecutes the appeal. The contract declared upon and of which the breach is assigned lies in parol and obligates defendant to furnish plaintiff the services of a surgeon possessing peculiar skill and ability for the treatment of her injury which was received through the negligence of defendant street car company.
The first question for consideration relates to the propriety of showing this agreement by parol notwithstanding a contemporaneous writing between the parties remotely touching…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Wakeman v. Wheeler & Wilson Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Fire Ins. Assn., Ltd. v. WickhamSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Pierce v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Browning v. Wabash Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Pennsylvania Co. v. DolanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Wells v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1970
- Sheets v. Hill Brothers Distributors, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1964
- Miller v. American Insurance CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1969
- Laclede Laundry Co. v. FreudensteinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Murphy v. HolliwayMissouri Court of Appeals · 1929
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.